http://blog.lib.umn.edu/stern130/muephy/ sane me en-us 2005-02-27T20:21:23-06:00 http://blog.lib.umn.edu/stern130/muephy/016816.html 5552 stern130 2005-02-27T20:21:23-06:00 http://blog.lib.umn.edu/stern130/muephy/015791.html Skip banner Home Sources How Do I? Site Map What's New Help Search Terms: 646 N.W.2d 527, Griffis, Luban FOCUS™ Edit Search Document ListExpanded ListKWICFULL format currently displayed Document 1 of 1. Katherine Griffis, Respondent, vs. Marianne Luban, petitioner, Appellant. C3-01-296 SUPREME COURT OF MINNESOTA 646 N.W.2d 527; 2002 Minn. LEXIS 461 July 11, 2002, Filed SUBSEQUENT HISTORY: Rehearing denied by Griffis v. Luban, 2002 Minn. LEXIS 606 (Minn., Aug. 13, 2002)US Supreme Court certiorari denied by Griffis v. Luban,... 5552 stern130 2005-02-12T18:40:30-06:00 http://blog.lib.umn.edu/stern130/muephy/015790.html Skip banner Home Sources How Do I? Site Map What's New Help Search Terms: Young, New Haven Advocate FOCUS™ Edit Search Document ListExpanded ListKWICFULL format currently displayed Previous Document Document 2 of 3. Next Document STANLEY K. YOUNG, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. NEW HAVEN ADVOCATE; GAIL THOMPSON; CAMILLE JACKSON; HARTFORD COURANT; BRIAN TOOLAN; AMY PAGNOZZI, Defendants-Appellants, and MICHAEL LAWLOR; CAROLYN NAH; NATIONAL ASSOCIATION FOR THE ADVANCEMENT OF COLORED PEOPLE; CONNECTICUT POST; RICK SAWYERS; KEN DIXON, Defendants. ADVANCE PUBLICATIONS, INCORPORATED; AMERICAN SOCIETY OF... 5552 stern130 2005-02-12T18:33:30-06:00 http://blog.lib.umn.edu/stern130/muephy/015789.html Skip banner Home Sources How Do I? Site Map What's New Help Search Terms: Revell, Lidov FOCUS™ Edit Search Document ListExpanded ListKWICFULL format currently displayed Document 1 of 2. Next Document OLIVER "BUCK" REVELL, Plaintiff-Appellant, versus HART G.W. LIDOV, an individual; BOARD OF TRUSTEES OF COLUMBIA UNIVERSITY IN THE CITY OF NEW YORK, a foreign corporation (Columbia University); COLUMBIA UNIVERSITY SCHOOL OF JOURNALISM, an agency and/or Department of Columbia University in the City of New York, Defendants-Appellees. No. 01-10521 UNITED... 5552 stern130 2005-02-12T18:28:53-06:00 http://blog.lib.umn.edu/stern130/muephy/015772.html 5552 stern130 2005-02-12T11:23:37-06:00 http://blog.lib.umn.edu/stern130/muephy/015763.html 5552 2-23 one or two page summary of paper topics 3-9 class in Walter library/ deadline for meeting with Kirtly 3-30 detailed outline with annotated biliography paper:; legal protections at stake in evolving definition of journalist: libel, coyright, who IS a journalist...maybe just the 3rd? 8002 3-4 GSO paper presentations 3-11 discussion leader, 1st paper due Paper Option 2; blogs as journalism. Paper : evolution of definition of a journalist, starting when? 8003 3-4 practice/consumption of journalism 3-11 abstracts due... Questions stern130 2005-02-11T23:10:17-06:00 http://blog.lib.umn.edu/stern130/muephy/015510.html Don't rely on Reynolds Recent rulings prove yet again that English courts are dangerous places for the press, says Martin Soames Monday February 7, 2005 The Guardian Th court of appeal carried out an exorcism last week, laying several libel ghosts to rest. This will be a relief for the media worldwide, particularly internet publishers. But the success of Dow Jones in contesting a claim brought by Yousef Jameel is only slightly diminished by the loss of an appeal by its sister publication, Wall Street Journal Europe. As with most hauntings, the history needs to be explained. Four years ago Dow Jones was sued by a Mr Gutnick, who claimed he had been libelled in Australia by one of their internet publications, originally uploaded in the States. Dow Jones argued that the proper place of publication for legal purposes was not Australia, where the claimant lived, but New Jersey, where the piece was uploaded to their server: if they should be sued anywhere (they said) it should be on their home territory where they would have the advantage of much more liberal libel laws. The Australian courts rejected Dow Jones's argument that a decision against it would expose it to liability under the defamation laws of "every country from Afghanistan to Zimbabwe". They held that publication occurred in any country where the material was available and it was received and read. If publishers were to exploit the ubiquity of the internet they had to face the international consequences, including liability in many different territories. Although the Gutnick case is now dead and gone, its spirit continued to haunt internet publishers. This created a special problem for the American media: should they clear their stories to their own tolerant standards or should they cut them back to those applied by the most restrictive jurisdiction in which they might be sued? Advertiser links London Theatre Tickets Book your theatre tickets securely online for all the West... theater-ticket.conciergedesk.co.uk London Theater Tickets With over 15 years satisfying London theatre goers we... officialtheatretickets.com Order London Theatre Tickets Online Now All London theater tickets available directly from... londontheatreboxoffice.com In practice, it seems most international news organisations decided to serve their home audience well and face the risks abroad - and the biggest of those risks was English libel litigation. In many cases, US news organisations running stories on the internet must have known that if they were sued in the English courts they would lose the argument that the claim should be brought in America as the primary place of publication (because of the ghost of Gutnick) and that they would then find themselves locked in the Dracula's castle of English libel litigation, from which few emerge unscathed. The court of appeal's decision in favour of Dow Jones shows a remarkable change in approach. Yousef Jameel sued over a piece published on a subscriber site accessible in the United Kingdom. In the usual way, his case assumed a substantial number of readers, probably about 6,000. Other presumptions followed, most significantly the presumptions that he had suffered damage and a substantial wrong. The story was a carefully researched piece about what is known as "the Golden Chain list", a document of dubious origin, which emerged from Bosnia in 1988 identifying rich Saudis who might have been approached for funding by Osama bin Laden, then our ally in the fight against Russia. The piece contained a hyperlink to the actual Golden Chain list. To put Dow Jones in the dock, Jameel relied not only on Gutnick but also on the 156-year-old spectre of the Duke of Brunswick's case, a particularly nasty instance of haunting by proxy in which, in order to sue, the Duke sent one of his servants out to buy a magazine 17 years after it had originally been published. The court held that publication was actionable, even though self-inflicted, and damage to the noble Duke could be presumed from it. But when the court of appeal learned in Jameel's case that the Golden Chain list had only been accessed by five readers, two of whom knew nothing of Jameel, with the other three being agents or associates of the claimant, it put a stake through his pleadings. Burying the Duke of Brunswick, the court held that damage could not be presumed from such insignificant publication and it would have a chilling effect on freedom of expression to allow the case to continue. It stopped it as an abuse of process While substantial internet publication in England will still carry the risk of liability, this decision shuts the door on cases based on technical or insubstantial publication here. This is likely to be an immediate help to US news organisations, particularly the Washington Post, which faces at least as artificial a claim from a Mr Bangoura in Canada. Of the two Jameel cases in which judgment was given on February 3 2005, this is the more significant, but Mohamed Jameel's case against the Wall Street Journal also needs to be considered. The Wall Street Journal unsuccessfully relied on the Reynolds defence, which originates from a case brought by Albert Reynolds, the former Irish prime minister, against the Sunday Times in 1999, and is meant to allow the publication of responsible journalism on matters of public interest. When this defence was first created it was acclaimed as a charter for the media who celebrated its recognition of the importance of freedom of expression and its declaration that "the press discharges vital functions as a bloodhound as well as a watchdog". It set out a 10-point list of factors to take into account in assessing the responsibility of journalism, even recognising that news can be a perishable commodity. Despite a couple of early successes, the Reynolds defence has been a disaster for the media. Too often the responsible journalism test has turned proceedings into an excruciating trial for journalists who have not written their stories with an eye to litigation. The final blow to the defence was probably given in George Galloway's success against the Telegraph, from which it seemed that breaking any one of the 10 points of principle would mean the defence would be lost. No journalism is that perfect, even when it is responsible. If anything the Jameel decision makes the test even harder by saying the requirements of responsible journalism will vary according to the gravity of the defamation involved. Dow Jones's victory matters more than the Wall Street Journal's loss. In reducing the risk of liability for online publication in England, Dow Jones has cleared the way for more open international publication. The loss of the Wall Street Journal case confirms what we already suspected: the Reynolds defence does not just smell funny, it is now a perishable commodity well past its sell-by date. It is good to have laid the ghosts of Gutnick and the Duke of Brunswick to rest at last. The moral for American publishers putting content into this jurisdiction is to limit and track English circulation. Otherwise, if travelling to this jurisdiction, rely on garlic and silver bullets rather than the Reynolds defence. · Martin Soames is a media litigation partner at DLA Piper Rudnick Gray Cary 5552 stern130 2005-02-08T21:10:06-06:00 http://blog.lib.umn.edu/stern130/muephy/015261.html How are newsblogs changing perceptions of journalism? Study innovations in news gathering thanks to blogs Define issues for departments of journalism How has the internet made people more or less responsible for informing themselves How will traditional definitions of "journalist" change to accommodate the internet? How will one-person publishing/broadcasting change our notion of journalism. Academic research has built in a realtively linear way, how will the internet change that?... Questions stern130 2005-02-04T20:59:37-06:00 http://blog.lib.umn.edu/stern130/muephy/015259.html Blogger Get your own blogNext blog BlogThis! Deuzeblog This is a Linkdump & K-log. Goal: Building Theory about New Media, Culture & Society. Topics: Media | News | Journalism | Culture. Thursday, October 21, 2004 The American Journalist This was my 3rd essay for Cultureweek (September 2004), but the paper came out two months late due to growing pains (sic). This is an edited version. It is election campaign frenzy in the United States. On television the networks and cable... Blogs and Essays stern130 2005-02-04T19:54:35-06:00 http://blog.lib.umn.edu/stern130/muephy/015257.html First Monday Read related articles on Electronic publishing and Internet publishing With a worldwide growing interest in journalism and journalists came an upswing in cross-national survey research among journalists from the print and broadcast media in the last five years. Since 1994 a new type of communicator is on the World Wide Web: the online journalist. Research into online journalism and journalists has been understandably scarce - the medium is young. Those studies that do exist suffer from a... 8003 journals stern130 2005-02-04T19:43:32-06:00 http://blog.lib.umn.edu/stern130/muephy/015256.html 8003 journals stern130 2005-02-04T19:11:28-06:00 http://blog.lib.umn.edu/stern130/muephy/015255.html Internet privacy practices of news media and implications for online journalism. Author: Hong TraciFrom: Journalism studiesDate: 20050201Volume: 6Issue: 1ISSN: 1461-670XPages: 15-... stern130 2005-02-04T18:59:37-06:00